MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6981263596

Do Regional Models Matter? Resource Allocation to Home Care in the Canadian Provinces of Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia & New Brunswick

2008· dissertation· en· W6981263596 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2008
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicByzantine Studies and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersIWK Health CentreDalhousie University
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)Health carePer capitaRestructuringPoliticsAutonomyMetropolitan areaResource allocationScope (computer science)Elite
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Proponents of Canadian health reform in the 1990s argued for regional structures, which enables budget silos to be broken down and integrated budgets to be formed. Although regionalization has been justified on the basis of its potential to increase home care resources, political science draws upon the scope of conflict theory, which instead suggests marginalized actors, such as home care, may be at risk of being cannibalized in order to safeguard the interests of more powerful actors, such as hospitals. Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick, constitute a natural policy experiment. Each has made different decisions about the regionalization model implemented to restructure health care delivery. The policy question underpinning this research is: What are the implications of the different regional models chosen on the allocation of resources to home care? Provincial governments are at liberty to fund home care within the limits of their fiscal capacity and there are no federal terms and conditions which must be complied with. This policy analysis used a case comparison research design with mixed methods to collect quantitative and qualitative data. Two financial outcomes were measured: 1) per capita provincial government home care expenditures and 2) the home care share of provincial government health expenditures. Hospital data was used as a comparator. Qualitative data collected from face-to-face, semi-structured interviews with regional elite key informants supplemented the expenditure data. The findings align with the scope of conflict theory. The trade-off between central control and local autonomy has implications for these findings: 1) home care in Prince Edward Island increased it share from 1.6% to 2.2% of provincial government health spending; 2) maintaining central control over home care in Nova Scotia resulted in an increase in its share from 1.4% to 5.4%, and 3) in New Brunswick, home care share grew from 4.1% to 7.6%. Inertia and entrenchment of spending patterns was strong. Health regions did not appear to undertake resource reallocation to any great extent in either Prince Edward Island or New Brunswick. Resource reallocation did occur in Nova Scotia where the hospital share of government spending went down and was reallocated to home care and nursing homes. But, Nova Scotia is the only province of the three in which home care was not regionalized. Regional interests in maintaining existing levels of in-patient hospital beds was clearly a source of tension between the overarching policy goals formulated for health reform by the provincial governments and the local health regions.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.710
Threshold uncertainty score0.775

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.233 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicByzantine Studies and HistoryFrench-language works237,207